2. The plaintiff's claim as to the above cancellation part is dismissed.

A. On January 16, 2018, the Defendant was awarded a subcontract for the D Apartment Empic Corporation (hereinafter “C”) from Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, the Defendant re-subcontracted part of the foregoing construction work to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).

B. Notwithstanding the fact that the Plaintiff is an employee of E, the Plaintiff received orders from G, which used the Defendant’s name as “the Vice Minister/Deputy Administrator,” and supplied construction materials equivalent to KRW 37,304,00 in total to the construction site (hereinafter “instant construction site”) during the period from January 17, 2018 to April 13, 2018, and received KRW 14,60,000,000, including KRW 4.6 million on March 6, 2018 and KRW 1,60,000,000 on April 9, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 13, 14 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was ordered by G that the Defendant permitted the Defendant to use the Defendant’s position and name, and supplied materials at the construction site of this case. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 22,704,00,000, and damages for delay.

On November 21, 2019, the Plaintiff made it clear that the cause of the claim is the same in the briefs prepared on November 21, 2019.

B. G that ordered construction materials to the Defendant’s assertion is not the Defendant’s employee but E’s employee.

Since C does not allow the subcontractor to re-subcontracts, the Defendant only allowed the employees of G and E to use only in relation to C, and only allowed them to use the name of the Defendant’s office.

The construction site of this case was a large-scale construction site where there were 30 to 40 re-contractors. At the time, the Plaintiff claimed the price to E and the price from E.